Download Self-Mortification and Self-Discipline in the Indian Wrestler As

Self-Mortification and Self-Discipline in the Indian Wrestler
As discussed in Chapter Ten of Introducing Anthropology of Religion, Hindu society traditionally
valorized self-mortification and asceticism not only for the religious “professional” like the monk or yogi
but also for all males, who could and ideally should enter into the role or life-stage of samnyasa in later
life. A Sanskrit word that means “abandonment” or “renunciation” (literally, “laying down everything”),
it was a time for the sannyasin (male renouncer) and occasionally the sannyasini (the female renouncer)
to “develop a categorically asocial attitude and style of life: he must go through life naked, alone,
wandering, celibate, begging, fasting, and silent” (Alter 1992: 318).
While we might profitably think of the religious ascetic as a sort of spiritual athlete, it is also worth
considering that the athlete may be a sort of ascetic and renouncer. In pursuing with singular focus their
goal, both may “lay down everything” in their quest for discipline and control, on the common premise
of “No pain, no gain.” According to Joseph Alter, the practitioner of wrestling (pahalwani) in India “seeks
to integrate ascetic values into the practice of everyday life by drawing a direct line between ascetic
values, wrestling discipline, and the moral duty of the common citizen” (319). Like athletes in other
societies, the “spatial, social, and substantive locus of a wrestler’s life is his akhara (gymnasium)”; unlike
athletes in many societies, “Hindu akharas are dedicated to Hanuman, the wrestler’s patron deity”
(319). In addition to the famous monkey-god, the gyms also feature “smaller shrines dedicated to Shiva,
other gods and goddesses, and local saints. Thus, an akhara is regarded as a sacred precinct and
wrestlers are careful to maintain the compound with an eye toward purity”; indeed, “in some instances
it is difficult to tell whether the central aspect of an akhara is the temple or the wrestling pit” (319).
Although wrestling is not an explicitly religious or spiritual activity, Alter found that wrestlers “argue that
they are like sannyasis because they subject their bodies to a similar disciplinary regime. The wrestler’s
regimen encodes a certain set of values in the wrestler’s physique; somaticity, that is, is the locus of the
wrestler/sannyasi analogy, an analogy that extends from the most banal and mundane to the most
subtle” (321).
On a superficial and often farcical level, wrestlers believe that they resemble sannyasis. Both
sannyasis and wrestlers wear langots (g-strings) and go about their routines in a state of near
nakedness. Just as sannyasis cover themselves with the ashes from sacrificial fires and funeral
pyres (cf. Parry 1982b), so wrestlers cover their bodies in akhara earth. While the elements
differ substantially, both are charged with vibhuti (power). The formal appearance of a
besmeared body is enough to make the analogy operative….
Like some sannyasis, wrestlers shave their heads completely or at least have their hair cut very
short. Though many sannyasis have long hair rather than no hair at all, sannyasis and wrestlers
alike are distinguished from other men by their radical attitude toward hair as a symbol of
identity. Why wrestlers are concerned with cutting and oiling their hair is as complex a question
as why some sannyasis let their hair grow matted and long (cf. Obeyesekere 1981). Short hair—
in conjunction with a range of other symbols—represents the vitality of radically controlled
sexual energy; it also symbolizes the wrestler's disregard for worldly fashion (322).
Of all the connections between wrestlers and religious specialists, the most pronounced is that “both
categories of person advocate absolute celibacy”:
A key symbol of the sannyasi’s world renunciation is his mastery of sensual desire. Significantly,
the Hindu sannyasi does not renounce sexuality, at least primarily, on moral grounds. To be
sure, he regards sex as polluting and sexual preoccupation as a sign of moral weakness, but to
focus on pollution and morality is to focus on the mores and taboos of interpersonal contact.
The sannyasi in fact sees sexuality as a central aspect of the integrated, energized body. Control
over sexuality generates a different kind of physico-moral fortitude than does a total denial of
sexuality, and it is the power of controlled sexuality with which the wrestler and the sannyasi
are concerned.
In the Hindu worldview, semen is a vital force that plays an integral part in maintaining a
person’s overall health. In a cosmological sense, semen is also a vital source of dynamic energy
(shakti), part and parcel of the very substance which drives the universe. By controlling his
sexuality, the sannyasi is tapping into this powerful life force; by not engaging in sex, he stores
up his semen and, through yoga and meditation, is able to channel its energy to the end of selfrealization (324-5).
In their emphasis on self-denial generally and celibacy specifically, both the wrestler and the sannyasin
model themselves after the god Hanuman, whose “divine power in his absolute celibacy, his control
over the latent energy (Shakti) of semen. It is in this sense that Hanuman is an ascetic, a fact clearly
reflected in the disciplinary practices of the various Ramanandi sannyasin suborders…. The Tyagis in
particular seek to ‘ignite’ the heat of tapas by internalizing the power of semen. Similarly, Nagas see
celibacy as central to the disciplinary practice of wrestling and exercise through which they ‘refine their
bodies’” (330).
Although it is perfectly obvious that religious “service and devotion become somewhat ‘secularized’ in
the wrestling arena” (331), this only proves the point of Chapter Eleven in Introducing Anthropology of
Religion that secularism is not the absence or antithesis of religion but is a type of vernacularization of
religion and the religionization of vernacular everyday life (see also Chapter Nine). In India, both
wrestling and religion involve “exercise” and discipline, controlling the body and excluding that which
interferes with one’s self-development and physical or spiritual progress. Both wrestlers and sannyasis
exemplify the lesson that religion is more than doctrine or devotion: wrestlers claim that they must not
only think about and revere Hanuman but that they must “also ‘act like Hanuman’: celibacy, humility,
and service become moral virtues and character traits rather than simply spiritual exercises mandated
by a particular form of ascetic devotionalism” (331).
Reference
Alter, Joseph S. 1992. “The ‘Sannyasi’ and the Indian Wrestler: The Anatomy of a Relationship.”
American Ethnologist 19 (2): pp. 317-336.